Premium content for only $0.99

Americans need a public option for health insurance – a government-administered single-payer system for all.

As with education, which we deem to be a societal need that warrants a government-run public option available to everyone, so too should we ensure access to health care. Small tweaks to the current failed system will not be enough to correct the disastrous course of profit-driven control over health care access.

The health insurance corporations are a powerful lobbying force, but they must not be allowed to dictate the future of our health care system in the nation.

Congress must be willing to stand up to them and do what is best for middle-class Americans. Voters have put Congress and the White House in the hands of Democrats, based largely on their promises to reform this system. If corporate special interests are yet again allowed to prevail in this debate, what will it take for real reform, an actual revolution?

BILL PATTON, Shelton

What freedoms are we fighting for?

Let’s speak the truth, shall we?

The elected officials of the U.S. government did not send troops to Normandy to protect freedoms in America. If they had, gays would be free to have the same civil rights as anyone else.

The elected officials of the U.S. government did not drop 100 million tons of cluster bombs on Laos and lie about it during the ’60s to ensure freedom in America. If they had, those of African heritage would have been free to attend any school they wanted, or eat at any lunch counter.

The elected officials of the U.S. government did not invade, torture and kill hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children in Iraq to ensure freedom in America. If they had, we would be free to feed, clothe, house, educate and keep all of the people in America healthy, instead of providing bankers with luxury vacations.

Kevin Benderman (Sgt. U.S. Army, ret.), spent 15 months in a military prison for saying he did not want to shoot children in Iraq.

Capt. James Yee, U.S. Army, was imprisoned for 76 days in solitary confinement for being kind to the prisoners at Guantanamo.

My father, who was the first man on the beach at Normandy, and who was of German heritage, was not free to say to the elected officials of the U.S. government, “No thank you, I don’t want to kill.”

What freedoms exactly do you think we’re fighting for? The freedom to keep killing?

Not me.

TERRENCE ZANDER, Olympia

Single-payer system is the answer

The editorial about the health care system’s problems failed to mention the best solution: replacing wasteful, greedy insurance companies with an efficient single-payer method.

The U.S.’s health care is by far the most expensive in the world, but we lag behind a great many countries in access, outcomes and other measures of effectiveness. The World Health Organization ranked us 37th.

Other health care reform proposals ignore this elephant in the room. They would enrich the insurance companies and use tax dollars to subsidize insurance for those who lack it.

The current system using insurance companies is terribly wasteful. Each insurance company has its own bureaucracy, its own rules, its own payment rates, its own claim forms, its own high-paid executives, its own advertising, and its own high profits. Patients and medical providers waste terrible amounts of time figuring out how to navigate those many redundant systems.

Also, a single-payer system would achieve economies of scale in administering the program. It would have the power to require low prices from pharmaceutical companies and hospitals.

The single-payer solution is the only way to solve the various problems efficiently, economically and democratically. It would cover everyone, improve health care results and save money.

GLEN ANDERSON, Lacey

Writers’ school ideas bad use of tax money

I feel that letter writers McKenzie Midles, Alex Giebelhaus and Brenna Peterson have and are trying to misuse our tax dollars.

Midles indicates that she can’t afford to care for her child. She wants the school system to raise her offspring at our cost while she works.

As for Giebelhaus, he states that the school system should supervise the kids while one is at work.

And then there is Peterson. She says that one of the best parts of the after-school program was playing outside.

Peterson wants to do away with field trips where, hopefully, some learning may take place.

After reading the letters written by these people it seems that the after-school programs are being used as a babysitting center.

Now, if people can’t afford to raise their child then they should consider putting their child up for adoption. Perhaps people should get themselves fixed so taxpayers won’t be expected to pay for their future children’s welfare, since they apparently can’t.